Love the pics, the 2nd and 4th pic remind me so much of Pfeiffer :)! Actually, in the 4th pic, the little puppy in the very back - looks SO much like P when I got her at the very beginning!

:) Good reason for this Ann (good eye, by the way). The dog in the front right is Livi's half brother ("Toot") and that is Livi's nephew (Toot's son) to the left of him. :D Livi looks a lot like both of them and Pfeiffer looks like her momma. Beautiful, huh?!

Tam

I used the photos show that the drastic differences FlDebra was talking about is not just between the partis and the biewers, There are drastic differences in the biewers and partis alone. The spotting gene is very unpredictable.
It starts with the breeder, A breeder must be knowledgeable and research, have their dogs health tested and be very selective about what dogs they breed to produce top quality dogs.
It is not just about putting 2 tri color dogs together to get puppies which unfortunately is what alot of people do.

I want to add a correction to my earlier post about the 3 color standard. I meant to say it isn't the 3 color standard that Mr Biewer originally had, His said white/blue/gold, it didn't include black.

I have to admit, it is difficult researching EITHER Biewer or Partis as there is such disagreement among those breeding them. For Parti's it seems that "anything goes" as long as the dog has white on it. That does not seem like very selective. Your examples are better than the ones I came up with on using the first 3 Partis to come up on search, but they still emphasize what is happening! Too far from Yorkie look & no consistency. You are right that many of those breeding yorkies, should not be breeding the ones they are either -- more selectivity is needed all the way around.

I appreciate the links, information and opinions you have provided in a most professional manner. Hope your Christmas was full of love, laughter & family! We thoroughly enjoyed ourselves here and I am a bit on the exhausted side but a good exhausted. :)

:D Hah! That is so awesome!! No wonder I saw Sweet P's face when I looked at those piccies. Pfeiffer poses *just* like Livi's nephew, and I see Livi's/Pfeiffer's coloring so much in those pics. :)

[QUOTE=Jaxx;3368086]The picture of the second Yorkie you posted is not a parti. It is a parti gene carrier.[/QUOTE
1. Ugh no. She's a Parti-if she were a carrier she'd be standard colors, look at her broken coat-she's not the dramatic representation but ask any Standard Yorkie breeder to identify her-they'd flip on anyone calling her a standard- or just a Parti carrier, a Parti carrier is scary to Standard Yorkie Breeders...which just means that a predominance of the recessive gene was brought out in that specific dog...I think they are all Yorkies the color standard just needs to be opened more, (excluding mutation-?)...just my opinion there.
2. Here's why Parti carriers scare Standard breeders (even though technically any Standard is a Parti carrier its just the term Parti Carrier is used for dog with a heavier part linage or they produce more Partis in their litters, expected litters) If she was just a carrier-she'd appear standard in coloration and then when bred to another standard, you'd see Parti's of all representations show up in the resulting pups, in a frequency indeterminable. Another misconception of Partis (that doesn't look Parti enough..but it's definitely not standard must be a carrier...uhg no.) is that they must appear dramatic as Biewers...but I'm now hearing Biewers and Partis are the same...just of different projected breeding results in the name of them having been change!
3. So glad for this thread, cleaning up simple misconceptions, learning tons, researching tons, and well this may not change any minds, present anything concrete (LOL) but it has definitely aided in many of the little things and WOW so nice everyone thus far has kept the attitude with the conversation minimal! Thanks Deb for the thread! I'm still trying to hear back from a breeder who has some old records posted on their site as to the actual text they came from so I can post a link here for reference!

[quote=concretegurl;3369660]Not completely correct. In order to be a parti-carrier, the dog would have to carry the recessive gene. Not all standards carry this gene, but any dog from a line that has thrown a parti has the potential to be a carrier. That's one of the reasons more accurate and honest AKC records would be helpful to those who wish to breed only standards.

Refusing to acknowledge they exist and refusing to register them does a disservice to all breeders.

1. I've seen that too and thus I saw Parti's and Biewers as different types of Yorkies...from what I have heard directly from many Parti breeders enthusiasts etc. that's the basic idea, anything goes-Parti simply means naturally occurring fault, partially colored in some or any way-yes, even if the color difference from the standard is just the appearance of some white.

**Sayign that isn't very selective-well that seems so open in determining "selective" did you mean in breeding standards period, or just the color result and basing that as selective? If you meant just in the resulting coloration-well I think many (I don't dare say most as I can't speak for them) Part breeders celebrate whatever coloration occurs so they do not exercise "selectiveness" there., thus I assume Biewers were created directly from Partis-they were the result (I though they were crossed out to another breed) of selective Parti breeding-apparently I was wrong there-?-unless you talk to some Biewer breeders whom swear they were crossed out...making them 'not Yorkie' so confusing. Glad Breezaway is here...

Isn't Breezaway great!? She really seems to know and have actually spent a lot of time researchign her Biewer history and concerning herself with where the breed is going-I've seen many other Biewer breeders with very high accreditation (championships notoriety n Biewer breeding) that couldn't repeat what she says correctly. Especially her honesty is talking about the genetic decline of Biewers because of their over inbreeding and Biewer to Biewer only practices, (thus my comments of the 'esteemed' Biewer breeder noted above specifically) many other Biewer breeders stress Biewer to Biewer breeding only.

2. Well, then again I only talk to those with selective responsible breeding practices 9that I'm aware of) but they do NOT discriminate by color selection as it seems many Biewer breeders do so. I mean responsible breeding practices like they only focus on pairing dogs appropriately, health, temperament, age, time between litters. minimum litters, many in fact are getting into certifications more and more-I think that certified (such as OFA) should be a requirement prerequisite to breeding period. If not you get dogs like my Elvis-again sorry Deb, I'd post links but you don't want stuff just directly from breeders-I'll post the links and references when I get 'em.

[quote=Rhetts_mama;3369683]I did leave that out I'm sorry when I said Parti carrier then bred to Standard I meant to add Standard, a standard with 'no history' of carrying the recessive gene in the line.

...but then again my oh my...

...that's a genetics debate too...those whom carry the gene and have had it presented in their linage and those whom carry the gene and it has and always will remain dormant-which do you label as a carrier? Technically speaking all humans carry the recessive gene to have a tail-it is simply blocked by more dominant genes-yet on super rare occasions babies around the world are born with a slight abnormal protrusion similar to an appendage (a "tail"). No, I am not speaking of the similar occurrence of chromosomal anomaly that result in extra appendages- I am talking specifically about the "tail" gene and it presence.

Ye a HUGE debate in genetic science itself is whom to and to not label a "carrier"....but for this purpose I should have added that-sorry!;)

[quote=concretegurl;3369660]The dog in the picture IS a parti carrier, I know because I own her.
That pic is Gracie when she was about 6 months old I think.
2nd is another pic of her and then a picture of her puppies she has now. She has 2 parti color and 2 carriers.

I've looked at the pictures and tried to figure out what I can from the thread, but I guess I just need "Yorkie colors for Dummies."

Dinky is black and turning brownish more and more, and he has splash of white on his chest. So as far as I can figure out some say would say he is a Parti? some would say he is not a Parti? some would even argue that he is not a Yorkie? some would say sure he is Yorkie, he just has a white area on his chest?


I'm just curious. My feelings won't be hurt. I love him just the way he is.

and also...He has been neutered. No Dinky DNA on the loose! :)

How old is he?
If he is registered you can see if there are any parti color lines in his pedigree. Without a pedigree it is hard to tell.

[quote=Breezeaway;3369725]Huh :( I'm so not with it! I saw her under the first pic on a post, apparently by you, I had Google under various other things for Parti research (from like two years ago I think I actually emailed you back then to talk about Partis, when I was looking for a one-I wanted a large male-I have since gotten my Elvis and then joined YT!) and she appeared white-I'm striking out all over right now with simply silliness! WOW! I see now under your site where it says "Our Parti Yorkies" you have her listed but then in the subtitle below you have her listed by pedigree...and I see the more recent picture-silver not white-her coat is actually very uniformed! I looked over her pedigree you have also listed on your site-all AKC registered.
Nicholas is a Parti...am I reading his pedigree correctly the AKC registered him as Black and Tan Parti? Or is that just a Pedigree you had done by another registry?
I should have used my own pic! LOl to demonstrate the diff of a non-dramatic Parti...like my Elvis-his white only looks really loud when his hair is long...

Here are a few links that challenge some of the views posted in this thread and a few new points, to make us all wonder ...

The YTCA's website calls Parti yorkies "Designer dogs" Yorkshire Terrier Club of America (Awards)

A portion of the YTCA's website article (also posted in post #1 of this thread in Gale Thompson's " Parti-Color Yorkshire Terriers" article) states:

A brief history of the development of the Yorkshire Terrier will show that the dog was developed in the 1800’s. In England, the Waterside Terrier was often crossed with the old English terrier, a silky coated black and tan or blue and tan terrier weighing around five pounds. When crafters from Scotland came into England, they brought several “Scotch“terriers, among them the Paisley and the Clydesdale. The Paisley was a small silky coated dog in various shades of blue. The Clydesdale was a blue and tan dog with the exact color pattern as the Yorkie of today. All of these original breeds were grizzle, tan, blue, blue and tan, or black and tan. No white dog or dogs with white markings were involved in the process of developing the breed. The first Yorkshire Terriers were entered at shows as Broken Haired Scotch and Yorkshire Terriers. In the early days, dog classes were often divided by size, under five pounds and over five pounds; however, there was never a class for colors other than the blue and tan we see today.

The article states that No white dog or dogs with white markings were involved in the process of developing the breed ... BUT

The Otter hound was used in the makeup of the Waterside terrier - Waterside terriers were used in the make up of the Yorkie according to the YTCA's Yorkie history page. Color's of the Otter hounds were not only grizzle or blue and tan in color but also piebald, chocolate and tan colored. Otterhound Colors

The YTCA article goes on to state that "The first Yorkshire Terriers were entered at shows as Broken Haired Scotch and Yorkshire Terriers. In the early days, dog classes were often divided by size, under five pounds and over five pounds; however, there was never a class for colors other than the blue and tan we see today" ... below is a link to the "Kennel Club Calendar and Stud book - 1874" showing classes for different colored scotch terriers, white, blue or fawn.

Kennel Club calendar & stud book - Google Books

Scotch terriers or broken haired scotch terriers were used in the make up of the yorkie; there are many early writings of blue, tan or white colored scotch terriers:

British rural sports: comprising ... - Google Books

There are additional links on my website, that direct you to other books mentioning off colored yorkies in early history or other colors of the dogs who were used in the makeup of the yorkshire terrier breed, including white skye terriers : Links - Pine Haven Yorkies

Books also mention white Yorkshire Terriers, here's one link:
A manual of toy dogs: how to breed ... - Google Books

Some of the first prize winning yorkshire terriers were blue and tan born Yorkies.
The American book of the dog: The ... - Google Books

Unlike the YTCA and AKC who feel the Maltese was never used in the foundation stock, the Kennel Club (UK) feels that the Yorkie was a result of crosses between dogs like the black and tan terrier, the maltese and the skye terrier. The Kennel Club

Numerous, numerous, numerous early writings also state that the maltese were used in the make up of the yorkshire terrier and that the Maltese were used to enhance the texture and length of the yorkies coat.

I have a newspaper article written in the 1960's, where a large number of members from the Skye Terrier Club of America, quit the club due to a dispute with AKC while trying to get a DQ rule for the Parti Colored coats showing up in the Skye breed (skyes being one of the dogs used in the early make up of this breed according to the UK kennel club).

Parti and other off colors have appeared in well known old time breeders and in well known show breeders lines, in addition to Nikkos, parti also has been seen in the Wildweir and Parquin kennel.

I appreciate the letter that Breezewood has posted from Joan Gordon but here is a letter from Loryn Bogren of Crownridge Yorkies, written several years ago, where she gave some insight to what she was told by AKC during the late 1990's after the Parti investigation began, as a result of her (Loryn) trying to get her parti colored Nikkos dogs registered.

"Let me know how it goes with your "off-color" club. I will help you any way I can. AKC went back as far as they could with the living dogs. They DNA'd about 42 litters. They also talked to a lot of the "old" breeders and they told them they had always been in the lines but were disposed of. Wildweir told AKC that they had more Partis than Gloria but they got "rid" of them. They didn't know the Parti color was a recessive gene and was really not gone, just not evident to the eyes. I still have their letter to me stating that the Parti color was a naturally occurring color and that they could not exclude them from the breed. Ours are NOT mixed. They are true purebred Yorkies.
Let me know what is going on. Hope you are all well and happy.
Loryn"

Written standards are a wonderful guide for trying to achieve that "perfect" goal but standards should not be taken so literally that it discriminates or casts aside healthy dogs, solely because of their nonstandard coat color due to recessive genes - these being the same non standard colors that have been documented in many early books about the breed and also surprisingly seen in the litter boxes of some of our old time and present day breeders. 125+ years ago when this breed began, coat color genetics was not understood like they are now (and believe me, there is still a lot to learn). There were also many old wives tales and untruths that led people to choose or not choose certain colors. White coats in some equine and canine breeds was thought to be inferior and weak, thus unwanted. Other than the blue born yorkies, golden, parti and chocolate colors are no more prone to health problems than the traditional steel blue and tan yorkie are - in other words, their color has not affected their health.

[quote=concretegurl;3369698]Simply put, if they have the recessive gene, then they are a carrier. They will only express the gene when mated to another carrier. This isn't one of those cases where another gene suppresses it.

[quote=concretegurl;3369783]All of my yorkies are AKC registered. Yes, Nicholas is registered with AKC as a black and tan Parti color. His pedigree is his AKC pedigree.
AKC does register parti's.

I find this statement controversial. Joan(Wildweir) wrote they just had one born and that they never spoke to AKC about their one tri color dog.
I don't think she would have lied to me about it. That is one of the reasons I contacted Joan Gordon , for the facts as I knew there were alot of hearsays out there.

I'm not trying to be controversial, just trying to present all sides of the story. Below is portion of another letter posted on YT by Enchanted toi in early 2009, when she was corresponding with Terri Shumsky. Terri talks about information that Florence Males told her (Florence was one of the AKC personnel, involved with the Nikkos parti investigation). Florence states that AKC asked Joan about parti showing up in litters and Joan said they had their own parti.

http://www.yorkietalk.com/forums/2430393-post59.html

Did Joan actually say in her letter to you, that she never told AKC about their one tri colored dog?

Yes she did say that. Here is the page she says it on. The part with red around it.

We have 2 written accounts from 2 different people who say that Wildweir did tell AKC about their having parti born in their own kennel, so it it strange that Joan Gordon said in her letter to you, that she never told AKC? Obviously she didn't tell AKC about Triplicate at the time she registered him, because if she had, he probably would have been denied registration?

I don't know why Loryn Bogren or Florence Males would lie about what they heard through AKC either, regarding Wildweir partis?

Well I am sure anyone who visited Wildweir Kennel in the 2 years they had Trippy probably saw him. You know how word gets around, as it goes from person to person it gets changed a bit each time.
Maybe Janet or Joan did mention it to Florence in a conversation at a show or something but didn't consider it as actually talking to AKC.

But I do wonder for someone trying to avoid the recessive parti gene, how would you do this? Meaning, when I was looking at pedigrees and beginning to learn what lines I like and what look I am looking for, they list coat colors, yet if the recessive gene is present how would anyone know?
I was reading the pedigree to the parti-colored girl that I used to own and every one of her ancestors are traditional colored. So I called a few breeders that breed parti-colored dogs and they said that was true for most of their parti-colored dogs (10 total dogs). So in order to register a parti-colored with the AKC you must submit pictures. Then as I think about it, when I registered her with the AKC I sent he pictures in and requested her coloring, when the AKC papers came back it said blue and gold. I immediately called the AKC and they checked the pictures and sent out new papers with her correct coloring..blue and gold, parti colored. So, if I had not done this or simply did not send in pictures I could have registered her as a blue and gold and who would know. How often do you think that happens? How often in the past with others?

There is only ONE club which has changed the standard under which biewers are shown in Germany.

Mr. Biewer's original standard does, indeed, call for 3 colors....
Attachment 334171

There are poor examples of every breed....just because one owns a tri colored dog...doesn't mean it should be bred and I see a LOT of that happening within both BREEDS.

We can all speculate however we wish but since Loryn and Florence were both directly involved in the AKC parti investigation (Florence being one of the agents investigating Loryn's Parti dogs), and both have a similar story of Wildweir telling AKC about their own parti(s), I don't want to discount what Florence and Loryn have said.

Triplicate and Nikko's Rolls Royce Ashley do have a common link in their pedigrees. And according to the AKC letter written to Loryn in 2000, where it sates "After conduction research into the breed history and receiving information and photographs of the dogs contained in your dogs pedigree, it was determined that this color can be produced in otherwise normal litters of Yorkshire Terriers," so I'm guessing that AKC, while researching the pedigrees and talking to breeders, found other dogs related to the Nikko's line, who had produced parti?

I can't answer your question but I hope someone with the knowledge to do so can...not so sure you can get a finite guarantee on that though...as far as the second part..hmmmmm so glad many breeders go above and beyond and paternity/maternity their litters (along with health testing and certifications) and include that to the information to the AKC-it proves lineage and also the truthfulness, authenticating the AKC registration-doubting their overall accountability is mute though-everyone messes up at least they're trying.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pinehaven (Post 3370026) Here are a few links that challenge some of the views posted in this thread and a few new points, to make us all wonder ... The YTCA's website calls Parti yorkies "Designer dogs" Yorkshire Terrier Club of America (Awards) A portion of the YTCA's website article (also posted in post #1 of this thread in Gale Thompson's " Parti-Color Yorkshire Terriers" article) states: A brief history of the development of the Yorkshire Terrier will show that the dog was developed in the 1800’s. In England, the Waterside Terrier was often crossed with the old English terrier, a silky coated black and tan or blue and tan terrier weighing around five pounds. When crafters from Scotland came into England, they brought several “Scotch“terriers, among them the Paisley and the Clydesdale. The Paisley was a small silky coated dog in various shades of blue. The Clydesdale was a blue and tan dog with the exact color pattern as the Yorkie of today. All of these original breeds were grizzle, tan, blue, blue and tan, or black and tan. No white dog or dogs with white markings were involved in the process of developing the breed. The first Yorkshire Terriers were entered at shows as Broken Haired Scotch and Yorkshire Terriers. In the early days, dog classes were often divided by size, under five pounds and over five pounds; however, there was never a class for colors other than the blue and tan we see today. The article states that No white dog or dogs with white markings were involved in the process of developing the breed ... BUT The Otter hound was used in the makeup of the Waterside terrier - Waterside terriers were used in the make up of the Yorkie according to the YTCA's Yorkie history page. Color's of the Otter hounds were not only grizzle or blue and tan in color but also piebald, chocolate and tan colored. Otterhound Colors The YTCA article goes on to state that "The first Yorkshire Terriers were entered at shows as Broken Haired Scotch and Yorkshire Terriers. In the early days, dog classes were often divided by size, under five pounds and over five pounds; however, there was never a class for colors other than the blue and tan we see today" ... below is a link to the "Kennel Club Calendar and Stud book - 1874" showing classes for different colored scotch terriers, white, blue or fawn. Kennel Club calendar & stud book - Google Books Scotch terriers or broken haired scotch terriers were used in the make up of the yorkie; there are many early writings of blue, tan or white colored scotch terriers: British rural sports: comprising ... - Google Books There are additional links on my website, that direct you to other books mentioning off colored yorkies in early history or other colors of the dogs who were used in the makeup of the yorkshire terrier breed, including white skye terriers : Links - Pine Haven Yorkies Books also mention white Yorkshire Terriers, here's one link: A manual of toy dogs: how to breed ... - Google Books Some of the first prize winning yorkshire terriers were blue and tan born Yorkies. The American book of the dog: The ... - Google Books Unlike the YTCA and AKC who feel the Maltese was never used in the foundation stock, the Kennel Club (UK) feels that the Yorkie was a result of crosses between dogs like the black and tan terrier, the maltese and the skye terrier. The Kennel Club Numerous, numerous, numerous early writings also state that the maltese were used in the make up of the yorkshire terrier and that the Maltese were used to enhance the texture and length of the yorkies coat. I have a newspaper article written in the 1960's, where a large number of members from the Skye Terrier Club of America, quit the club due to a dispute with AKC while trying to get a DQ rule for the Parti Colored coats showing up in the Skye breed (skyes being one of the dogs used in the early make up of this breed according to the UK kennel club). Parti and other off colors have appeared in well known old time breeders and in well known show breeders lines, in addition to Nikkos, parti also has been seen in the Wildweir and Parquin kennel. I appreciate the letter that Breezewood has posted from Joan Gordon but here is a letter from Loryn Bogren of Crownridge Yorkies, written several years ago, where she gave some insight to what she was told by AKC during the late 1990's after the Parti investigation began, as a result of her (Loryn) trying to get her parti colored Nikkos dogs registered. "Let me know how it goes with your "off-color" club. I will help you any way I can. AKC went back as far as they could with the living dogs. They DNA'd about 42 litters. They also talked to a lot of the "old" breeders and they told them they had always been in the lines but were disposed of. Wildweir told AKC that they had more Partis than Gloria but they got "rid" of them. They didn't know the Parti color was a recessive gene and was really not gone, just not evident to the eyes. I still have their letter to me stating that the Parti color was a naturally occurring color and that they could not exclude them from the breed. Ours are NOT mixed. They are true purebred Yorkies. Let me know what is going on. Hope you are all well and happy. Loryn" Written standards are a wonderful guide for trying to achieve that "perfect" goal but standards should not be taken so literally that it discriminates or casts aside healthy dogs, solely because of their nonstandard coat color due to recessive genes - these being the same non standard colors that have been documented in many early books about the breed and also surprisingly seen in the litter boxes of some of our old time and present day breeders. 125+ years ago when this breed began, coat color genetics was not understood like they are now (and believe me, there is still a lot to learn). There were also many old wives tales and untruths that led people to choose or not choose certain colors. White coats in some equine and canine breeds was thought to be inferior and weak, thus unwanted. Other than the blue born yorkies, golden, parti and chocolate colors are no more prone to health problems than the traditional steel blue and tan yorkie are - in other words, their color has not affected their health

Some references really need to be read before accepting as evidence of anything. For example, you wrote, "Books also mention white Yorkshire Terriers, here's one link: A manual of toy dogs: how to breed ... - Google Books
It says:
"The white yorkshires, a new variety some folk have tried to push is, I think, in no way especially desireable -- the Maltese can do all that is necessary in that line; while the attempt to make "silver" Yorkshires popular, too, simply means that bad-coloured dogs without any tan (paleness of tan is the stumbling-block in many a Yorkshire's career), are classed by themselves and offered prizes." So, what is this author actually saying? Sounds to me like he is saying in some of the yorkshires the tan is appearing so pale as to almost be white. It is not really a reference of substance as it does not refer to any particular dog or breeder. It does not mention the markings in any detail other than to explain the paleness of the tan. I do not think this refers to the Parti-s as being discussed. But it is taken out of context and difficult to tell exactly what the author meant. It is also only ONE book not plural as you state. Do you have another book?

Another conflicting reference: You also quote a letter from Loryn saying "Wildweir told AKC that they had more Partis than Gloria but they got "rid" of them. " yet Joan Gordon herself, wrote to Breezewood that in ALL the YEARS she and her sister bred yorkies they only ever had on puppy with white on it and they gave the information for its dam and sire -- all of which were spayed/neutered. After typing this I see Breezewood has already addressed this discrepancy.

Several references are listed late in this thread as discussion with a breeder who said she spoke with another breeder who said they saw something. That is pushing "heresay evidence" to the extreme which really cannot be counted as documentary evidence of anything. A good reference is one directly from the breeder involved as Breezewood posted a quote directly from a letter she received from Joan Gordon.